> On Jul 20, 2016, at 11:37 AM, Haravikk via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 20 Jul 2016, at 14:55, Tino Heth <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> Am 17.07.2016 um 18:31 schrieb Haravikk <[email protected]>: >>> >>> I may move discussion of other collection types to its own section though, >>> to make the core proposal as simple as possible, and leave it up to the >>> core team whether to do that part. >> imho this is a good idea: Its increased power is a major argument for the >> proposal, but the schedule seems to be very tight already… and I guess the >> discussion about possible problems caused by variadic functions which can be >> called with an explicit collection could be a real distraction, whereas the >> basic idea is so clear that there shouldn't be any valid reasons to not >> accept it. > > I've created a new pull request for this, you can view the updated file here: > https://github.com/Haravikk/swift-evolution/blob/a13dc03d6a8c76b25a30710d70cbadc1eb31b3cd/proposals/nnnn-variadics-as-attribute.md > > Hopefully it's still clear; I know I have a nasty tendency to be overly > verbose with wording and stuff, though the first example should keep the meat > of the proposal straightforward =)
I’m sorry I’m late to this thread, but I’m personally strongly opposed to this. The problem being solved here is so minor that I don’t see a reason to make a change. Further, the proposed syntax is so heavy weight that it will adversely affect readability of the API. -Chris _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
